When former United States President Barack Obama remarked, 'If you do not protect the rights of ethnic minorities in India, there is a strong possibility that India, at some point, starts pulling apart', he only proved that colonialism is deeper than skin colour.
The Balkanization of India is a long-time fantasy of imperialists of every hue. Those of the British colonial variety believed that it was the superiority of the British Raj that held India together. Churchill proclaimed that openly.
Pakistan was, in a way, a realisation of that fantasy.
It was not because of the British rule and nor because of the post-independent Nehruvian rulers that India is still together. It is despite them.
When Naga Christian terrorists threatened the Buddhist tribes of Arunachal Pradesh, when Baptist Christian terrorists killed and issued Christian fatwas against Hindu Jamatiyas in Tripura, when Christian Mizo militants drove away Hindu Reangs from Mizoram to live in sub-human conditions in refugee camps for more than a quarter of a century in neighbouring states, - were they not attacks on 'ethnic minorities'?
Who spoke for all those 'ethnic minorities'? The Hindutvaites, who themselves would have differed from each of these 'ethnic minorities' in terms of superficial cultural features.
In the larger Indian land mass that comprises of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, when Sindhi Hindus of Pakistan are being constantly persecuted, what is the United States doing?
Did the Obama administration ever care to talk for them?
When the Chakma Buddhist tribes of Bangladesh were driven away as refugees did the Obama or Clinton administrations raise their voices?
Every tenant of White House since 1971 had a moral responsibility to answer for siding with Pakistan when it was carrying out a genocide of Hindus in what was then East Pakistan.
Instead of that, when Barack Obama talks about 'India pulling apart', it comes across as offensive.
The minorities of India
In fact, India is full of the so-called minorities.
Saivites are minorities with respect to all non-Saivaites. Tamils are minorities with respect to all non-Tamils. Jamatiyas are minorities with respect to all non-Jamatiyas. Shias are minorities even in their Muslim community. Ahmadiyas will be one of the most persecuted minorities if ever India becomes non-Hindu.
Hindu majority is not majoritarianism. Hindus being majority means this nation still has a majority of people who believe in non-proselytizing, mutually respectful co-existence.
If this Hindu majority also becomes politically aware then that shall be the greatest protection to every minority - not just ethnic or religious, but also gender and linguistic.
At the same time such a politically aware Hindu majority would resist the expansionist politics of not only Islamism but also evangelical crusade-ism.
Responding to Obama by highlighting his middle name is juvenile and unnecessary. What we do need to understand though is that why instead of embracing the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr., Obama chose to adopt the language and mindset of an imperialist like Churchill.
As you are no doubt aware, Swarajya is a media product that is directly dependent on support from its readers in the form of subscriptions. We do not have the muscle and backing of a large media conglomerate nor are we playing for the large advertisement sweep-stake.
Our business model is you and your subscription. And in challenging times like these, we need your support now more than ever.
We deliver over 10 - 15 high quality articles with expert insights and views. From 7AM in the morning to 10PM late night we operate to ensure you, the reader, get to see what is just right.
Becoming a Patron or a subscriber for as little as Rs 1200/year is the best way you can support our efforts.